2026 Aston Martin Aramco Formula One Team

[Ashwinv16]

How much laptime is the Honda upgrade rumored to bring? I'd guess the bump in regen to the max should be sizeable in itself.

theres been so many rumours. anywhere between 20-50 hp is the alleged gain. then as you said the regen etc and deployment. probably between 4-8 tenths depending on track if i was to guess

the most "accurate" info is 30bhp in raw power but 60bhp in regen. The current regs makes this hard to explain but basically regen would be on par to All teams now (maybe better but that delusional) so same amount of superclipping as other teams.

A word to point out, both Ferrari and Audi used their ADUO and made very little progress. However the ADUO parts for Honda are diffrent, most of these upgardes are parts fitted to the car that was developed well before but could'nt be applied due to homolgation deadline. In other words this was suppossed to be the final design for the orginal engine but its coming now (for the most part) its going to be down on power still however it might be the biggest jump in raw horse power and torque you will see for this regulation set.

Also Alonso is garunteed to have a 5+ grid penalty as the upgrades will exceed the Ancilary units usage which need changing for the upgrade. The rumour is that the mgu-k, energy store and control electronic have been pooled so both drivers have the 2-3 lefts 1 brand new. However not sure if Honda will use two Aduos for energy store which mean both drivers will atart at the back no matter where they qualify.

[PlatinumZealot]

How much laptime is the Honda upgrade rumored to bring? I'd guess the bump in regen to the max should be sizeable in itself.

Could be 1 second maximum. Assuming it's a compounding effect of more power unlocking more deployment unlock better downforce etc.

[mzso]

The rumour is that the mgu-k, energy store and control electronic have been pooled so both drivers have the 2-3 lefts 1 brand new. However not sure if Honda will use two Aduos for energy store which mean both drivers will atart at the back no matter where they qualify.

If they changed the mounting as expected, then I doubt the K could be the same specification.

[diffuser]

The rumour is that the mgu-k, energy store and control electronic have been pooled so both drivers have the 2-3 lefts 1 brand new. However not sure if Honda will use two Aduos for energy store which mean both drivers will atart at the back no matter where they qualify.

If they changed the mounting as expected, then I doubt the K could be the same specification.

All that is eligible to be changed under ADUO. They've already released the aero upgrades, so whatever they're changing, it needs to fit back into the same space.

[mzso]

The rumour is that the mgu-k, energy store and control electronic have been pooled so both drivers have the 2-3 lefts 1 brand new. However not sure if Honda will use two Aduos for energy store which mean both drivers will atart at the back no matter where they qualify.

If they changed the mounting as expected, then I doubt the K could be the same specification.

All that is eligible to be changed under ADUO. They've already released the aero upgrades, so whatever they're changing, it needs to fit back into the same space.

I reacted to his statement that AM pooled K and other components. Which doesn't matter if a new spec was designed for the PU.
I don't expect to space be a factor. They started tight and remained as such. By the way they also said, more updates are coming for Zandvoort, so it might as well be PU changes related.

[ispano6]

How much laptime is the Honda upgrade rumored to bring? I'd guess the bump in regen to the max should be sizeable in itself.

theres been so many rumours. anywhere between 20-50 hp is the alleged gain. then as you said the regen etc and deployment. probably between 4-8 tenths depending on track if i was to guess

the most "accurate" info is 30bhp in raw power but 60bhp in regen. The current regs makes this hard to explain but basically regen would be on par to All teams now (maybe better but that delusional) so same amount of superclipping as other teams.

A word to point out, both Ferrari and Audi used their ADUO and made very little progress. However the ADUO parts for Honda are diffrent, most of these upgardes are parts fitted to the car that was developed well before but could'nt be applied due to homolgation deadline. In other words this was suppossed to be the final design for the orginal engine but its coming now (for the most part) its going to be down on power still however it might be the biggest jump in raw horse power and torque you will see for this regulation set.

Also Alonso is garunteed to have a 5+ grid penalty as the upgrades will exceed the Ancilary units usage which need changing for the upgrade. The rumour is that the mgu-k, energy store and control electronic have been pooled so both drivers have the 2-3 lefts 1 brand new. However not sure if Honda will use two Aduos for energy store which mean both drivers will atart at the back no matter where they qualify.

Where is this accurate information from? This new PU is not what was intended for homologation at the beginning of the year. And no ancillary changes are required for this 3rd spec PU. The changes are entirely internal and Orihara has stated you wouldn't know the difference looking at it from the outside. They changed the shape of the piston, piston crown, combustion chamber, precombustion chamber, lubricant delivery method. This design wasn't originally planned for the beginning of the season and was realized after doing further single cylinder tests with their optical cylinder combustion/simulation methods. The friction reduction is what I'm curious as to why they had the issue in the first place. I'm thinking there was an issue with uniform flame propagation that lead to uneven piston movement within the cylinder.

[ispano6]

I totally agree

Note that we are talking about coasting while in neutral (not seen, by the way).

Edit: and / or under no request of throttle by the driver.

What made me think this is happening to some degree with other teams is when Mercedes drivers were lifting in Silverstone at the start finish line. They gave away a tactic that alluded to such tactics being cleverly used even though it may seem counterintuitive. I think Kimi is thriving because he doesn't have to unlearn a tendency that Russell keeps returning to. Similarly, I think Alonso may be stuck to his ways and might need to unlearn his driving style but at least it did seem he acknowledged this. The best drivers adapt to this need to change.

[etusch]

[dren]

Awesome, thanks for the post.

[diffuser]

I totally agree

Note that we are talking about coasting while in neutral (not seen, by the way).

Edit: and / or under no request of throttle by the driver.

What made me think this is happening to some degree with other teams is when Mercedes drivers were lifting in Silverstone at the start finish line. They gave away a tactic that alluded to such tactics being cleverly used even though it may seem counterintuitive. I think Kimi is thriving because he doesn't have to unlearn a tendency that Russell keeps returning to. Similarly, I think Alonso may be stuck to his ways and might need to unlearn his driving style but at least it did seem he acknowledged this. The best drivers adapt to this need to change.

The scenario where at "300 km/h → ECU detects coasting → automatically selects neutral → charges battery" is not allowed by the rules. Neutral can only be selected by the driver. The ECU might be allowed to charge the battery in neutral above 50kph though.

Article C9.8.3 says:

Each individual gear change must be separately initiated by the driver.
A shift to gearbox neutral is specifically allowed as a multiple-change exception, but it must be “following a request from the driver.”
Automatic gear changes are classified as a driver aid and are not permitted.

C5.2.12 prohibits MGU-K use until 50 km/h

Also, you would hit the shifter to come out of neutral and that normally sticks you in 1st gear.

[ispano6]

The scenario where at "300 km/h → ECU detects coasting → automatically selects neutral → charges battery" is not allowed by the rules. Neutral can only be selected by the driver. The ECU might be allowed to charge the battery in neutral above 50kph though.

Article C9.8.3 says:

Each individual gear change must be separately initiated by the driver.
A shift to gearbox neutral is specifically allowed as a multiple-change exception, but it must be “following a request from the driver.”
Automatic gear changes are classified as a driver aid and are not permitted.

C5.2.12 prohibits MGU-K use until 50 km/h

Also, you would hit the shifter to come out of neutral and that normally sticks you in 1st gear.

Interesting, so it's allowed as part of a driver initiated action, such as downshifting. But say this rule is open to interpretation and some teams consider disengaging the drivetrain in a way that the gears don't change but the PU power goes mainly to the MGUK with some clever engineering. Again, not saying Honda is doing this neutral rev limit, but the reason why you wouldn't shift from 7th to 8th would still be to keep the RPMs highest as possible for when you do start clipping/regen. What we're calling neutral could just be 7th gear coasting but the drivetrain itself avoids as much engine braking as possible and instead charges the battery via the MGUK. I suppose this aspect could also be manually set by the driver to use that map or mode to avoid automatic driver aids. If we here can conceive of such a use case I imagine the PU/gearbox software engineera have considered it as well.

As for when 8th gear is used, like another mentioned it's possible it is reserved for overtake mode. There's a lot of talk about algorithms but it seems like a misuse of the word or actual concept as it applied as if it is constantly changing while the driver is on the track and under changing conditions and scenarios. It could be considered a driver aid if the map is designed specifically for the circuit. So I'm thinking the driver has to choose a map that changes the operation but is otherwise consistent regardless of the track layout. I also think the FIA would have to heavily monitor the map usage and how the driver is instructed to use said map. It may be other teams that call it out before the FIA notices too.

[Ashwinv16]

I hate this cause internal targets could mean anything from 60hp to "it runs"

[diffuser]

The scenario where at "300 km/h → ECU detects coasting → automatically selects neutral → charges battery" is not allowed by the rules. Neutral can only be selected by the driver. The ECU might be allowed to charge the battery in neutral above 50kph though.

Article C9.8.3 says:

Each individual gear change must be separately initiated by the driver.
A shift to gearbox neutral is specifically allowed as a multiple-change exception, but it must be “following a request from the driver.”
Automatic gear changes are classified as a driver aid and are not permitted.

C5.2.12 prohibits MGU-K use until 50 km/h

Also, you would hit the shifter to come out of neutral and that normally sticks you in 1st gear.

Interesting, so it's allowed as part of a driver initiated action, such as downshifting. But say this rule is open to interpretation and some teams consider disengaging the drivetrain in a way that the gears don't change but the PU power goes mainly to the MGUK with some clever engineering. Again, not saying Honda is doing this neutral rev limit, but the reason why you wouldn't shift from 7th to 8th would still be to keep the RPMs highest as possible for when you do start clipping/regen. What we're calling neutral could just be 7th gear coasting but the drivetrain itself avoids as much engine braking as possible and instead charges the battery via the MGUK. I suppose this aspect could also be manually set by the driver to use that map or mode to avoid automatic driver aids. If we here can conceive of such a use case I imagine the PU/gearbox software engineera have considered it as well.

As for when 8th gear is used, like another mentioned it's possible it is reserved for overtake mode. There's a lot of talk about algorithms but it seems like a misuse of the word or actual concept as it applied as if it is constantly changing while the driver is on the track and under changing conditions and scenarios. It could be considered a driver aid if the map is designed specifically for the circuit. So I'm thinking the driver has to choose a map that changes the operation but is otherwise consistent regardless of the track layout. I also think the FIA would have to heavily monitor the map usage and how the driver is instructed to use said map. It may be other teams that call it out before the FIA notices too.

I think you stay in 7th because it takes less power to maintain your speed, leaving more power to charge the battery. A less likely scenario is that the higher RPM puts the ICE in a better power range, allowing it to maintain higher turbo boost, etc.

[aMessageToCharlie]

The scenario where at "300 km/h → ECU detects coasting → automatically selects neutral → charges battery" is not allowed by the rules. Neutral can only be selected by the driver. The ECU might be allowed to charge the battery in neutral above 50kph though.

Article C9.8.3 says:

Each individual gear change must be separately initiated by the driver.
A shift to gearbox neutral is specifically allowed as a multiple-change exception, but it must be “following a request from the driver.”
Automatic gear changes are classified as a driver aid and are not permitted.

C5.2.12 prohibits MGU-K use until 50 km/h

Also, you would hit the shifter to come out of neutral and that normally sticks you in 1st gear.

There's a lot of talk about algorithms but it seems like a misuse of the word or actual concept as it applied as if it is constantly changing while the driver is on the track and under changing conditions and scenarios. It could be considered a driver aid if the map is designed specifically for the circuit. So I'm thinking the driver has to choose a map that changes the operation but is otherwise consistent regardless of the track layout. I also think the FIA would have to heavily monitor the map usage and how the driver is instructed to use said map. It may be other teams that call it out before the FIA notices too.

There were lots of driver comments this year, explicitly stating that the AI / algorithm has been adjusting the deployment substantially based on where the driver lifted in the lap or corners before, so evidently it is constantly changing under changing scenarios.

[ispano6]

I hate this cause internal targets could mean anything from 60hp to "it runs"

They are bringing a big step already confirmed in the dyno, Orihara is happy with what HRC developed, met internal targets means more than just "it runs"...